I find that to be the fundamental flaw of libertarianism. Without government, you have anarchy, and anarchy has never yet proven to be a good thing. I believe in LIMITED government, but I do believe in having rules and clear consequences for violating them. I also believe in massively retaliating against those who murder our citizens for no good reason.

Her thesis wasn't all or nothing like that. It had to do with what was going on in the world at the time, which was individual , family, community etc power being sublimated to governments. People felt that was the way civilization was headed. She was saying no, It was in free societies that human beings discovered how to harness their creative/ individual energies. What the communists are doing isn't new, it very very old. early pagan sort of peoples believed their leaders were Gods and that their lives were determined by fate.

This was post Great Depression when people were clamoring for collectivism. She wasn't an Emma Goldman type person

I find that to be the fundamental flaw of libertarianism. Without government, you have anarchy, and anarchy has never yet proven to be a good thing. I believe in LIMITED government, but I do believe in having rules and clear consequences for violating them. I also believe in massively retaliating against those who murder our citizens for no good reason.

Isn't the original premise of Anarchism (and subsequently Libertarianism) that the basic goodness of human nature will prevail and we will all be good to each other, given the chance (freedom)? That we don't need to be constrained to behave acceptably by laws and their enforcement? It's a pretty thought.

It is a very pretty, whimsical, idealistic thought!Unfortunately, it is at odds with 5,000 years of recorded human history.With no consequences at all for their behavior, people tend to lose their veneer ofcivilization pretty quickly and give vent to their savage, violent side. Not all people -but enough of them to make life pretty awful for those who DO try to live nice, peaceful lives!

With no consequences at all for their behavior, people tend to lose their veneer ofcivilization pretty quickly and give vent to their savage, violent side. Not all people -but enough of them to make life pretty awful for those who DO try to live nice, peaceful lives!

Isn't the simplest solution to then declare the difficult cases 'non-persons' (since they do not conform to the definitive decent human behaviour) and proceed to exterminate remove them as dangerous vermin?

I'm not sure there has ever been a "good" government, per se, just exercises in less evil forms of government, with some systems of government, and those who head it, going far off the deep end of the bad scale. Even our present-day American republic is bloated, clumsy, bureaucratic, corrupt, controlled by special interests, it panders to the masses and sees participation, both in elected office and in the electorate, by those who do society no favors by being there. It is, however, thus far, the best system humanity has devised. At least from what I can tell, and at least until we can evolve toward some sort of benign meritocracy, which I doubt we ever will.

I can see it now - I'll be meeting with my council of regents, deep in discussion about whether Kim Jong Un should be executed or simply required to clean all the boy's locker rooms in the USA with his tongue, and RC will break down the door with a keg under one arm and a girl under the other, screaming"PAAAARRRRRRTTAAAYYYYY!!!" at the top of his lungs.